"Google and MPEG LA announced today that they have entered into agreements granting Google a license to techniques that may be essential to VP8 and earlier-generation VPx video compression technologies under patents owned by 11 patent holders. The agreements also grant Google the right to sublicense those techniques to any user of VP8, whether the VP8 implementation is by Google or another entity. It further provides for sublicensing those VP8 techniques in one next-generation VPx video codec. As a result of the agreements, MPEG LA will discontinue its effort to form a VP8 patent pool." The word that stood out to me: the auxiliary verb 'may', which has a rather low epistemic modality. To me, this indicates that this is not so much a clear-cut case of VP8 infringing upon patents, but more a precautionary move on Google's part.

It's free for you to use via Google but it will never be free for Google for you to use it. Again, if Google and the free software idealogues are cool with that delusion, so am I. I will still call it "paid by Google" and not free.

It's free for you to use via Google but it will never be free for Google for you to use it. Again, if Google and the free software idealogues are cool with that delusion, so am I. I will still call it "paid by Google" and not free.

You are assuming that Google are paying something. That is not indicated by the facts. It could well be that Google have simply agreed to not assert the patents in VP8 they hold against any of the MPEG LA consortium.